Ryan v. Ohmer
District Court, S.D. New York
In Equity. Suit by Thomas J. Ryan against Will I. Ohmer, the Recording & Computing Machines Company, and the Canadian Car & Foundry Company, Limited. Defendants appeared specially moving to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, and the Recording Company and Canadian Company moved to quash the subpoena.
1Opinion of the Court
MAYER, District Judge.
[1] First. The most interesting feature of this motion is the fact that, with a wide diversity of opinion outstanding, the question of jurisdiction has never been passed on by the Supreme Court. The first motion is to dismiss for want of jurisdiction because plaintiff is a citizen of New York, two of the defendants citizens of Ohio, and the third defendant an alien corporation; in .other words, because a New York plaintiff has sued in New York and joined as defendants two Ohio citizens and a Canadian alien corporation. The question-presented arises under section 24 of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Smith v. LyonSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- King v. CornellSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Ladew v. Tennessee Copper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Ladew v. Tennessee Copper Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Tennessee · 1910
- Gage v. Riverside Trust Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1906
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lucas Goar v. Compania Peruana De VaporesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
- K & H Business Consultants Ltd. v. Cheltonian, Ltd.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1983
- Zendle v. Garfield Aniline Works, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1928